New Arkansas abortion laws blocked by federal judge

From Fox News: A federal judge has blocked the state of Arkansas from enforcing four new abortion restrictions. U.S. District Court Judge Kristine Baker(appointed by Obama) issued a preliminary injunction late Friday against the new abortion restrictions, three of which were set to take effect Tuesday.

The laws include a ban on a common procedure known as dilation and evacuation. Abortion-rights supporters contend it’s the safest and most common procedure used in second-trimester abortions. Abortion activists also argued that doing away with the procedure would make it impossible for women to get an abortion in their second trimester.

Pro-life groups criticized the procedure, which is surgical, as “barbaric.”

The American Civil Liberties Union and Center for Reproductive Rights sued Arkansas over the restrictions, which lawmakers approved earlier this year. The two groups sued on behalf of Dr. Frederick Hopkins, a Little Rock abortion provider. The groups say the laws would make it nearly impossible for many women in the state to get an abortion.

“(The law) would essentially end access to second-trimester abortions in Arkansas,” Brigitte Amiri, an attorney for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU), told NBC News.

Similar bans are in effect in Mississippi and West Virginia and have been blocked by court rulings in Alabama, Kansas, Louisiana and Oklahoma. A ban approved in Texas will take effect in September and is also being challenged in court. The groups said the ban would have a devastating impact, while the state argued that alternative procedures are available.

“The threatened harm to Dr. Hopkins and the fraction of women for whom the Mandate is relevant clearly outweighs whatever damage or harm a proposed injunction may cause the State of Arkansas,” Baker wrote in her ruling.

Baker’s ruling also halted a law that would have imposed new restrictions on the disposal of fetal remains from abortions. The plaintiffs argued that it could also block access by requiring notification of a third party, such as the woman’s sexual partner or her parents, to determine what happens to the fetal remains. The state has said the law does not require permission or notice from those third parties before an abortion and includes several provisions that ensure notice or consent is not required to dispose of the fetal remains.

Baker said the law would dissuade doctors from performing abortions and create significant delays for women seeking the procedure.

Baker also blocked part of a law set to take effect in January that would ban abortions based solely on the fetus’ sex. The groups are challenging the law’s requirement that a doctor performing the abortion first request records related to the entire pregnancy history of the woman. The plaintiffs say the requirement would violate a patient’s privacy and indefinitely delay a woman’s access to abortion.

The judge also blocked a law that would expand a requirement that physicians performing abortions for patients under 14 take certain steps to preserve embryonic or fetal tissue and notify police where the minor resides. The new measure, which was also set to take effect Tuesday, would have raised the age requirement to less than 17 years of age.

The block came hours after a federal court panel cleared the way for Arkansas to enforce a law that will limit how the abortion pill can be administered. Baker blocked the 2015 law that required doctors who provide such pills to maintain a contract with another physician who has admitting privileges at a hospital and who agrees to handle any complications.

14 responses to “New Arkansas abortion laws blocked by federal judge”

The “dilation & extraction” (D&E or D&X) method involves “reducing” in diameter the largest part of the baby’s head to allow vaginal passage. According to the American Medical Association, this procedure has four main steps. You decide if this isn’t barbaric:

(1) Usually, preliminary procedures are performed over a period of two to three days, to gradually dilate the cervix using laminaria tents (sticks of seaweed which absorb fluid and swell) and drugs to induce labor.
(2) Once the cervix is sufficiently dilated, the doctor uses an ultrasound and forceps to grasp the baby’s leg and pull one or both legs out of the cervix, which is why the procedure is called “partial birth”.
(3) The doctor then makes an incision at the base of the baby’s skull and inserts a blunt dissector (such as a Kelly clamp) into the incision to widen the incision. Then, a suction catheter is inserted into the skull to suction out the baby’s brain, which causes the skull to collapse and allows the fetus to pass more easily through the cervix.
(4) The placenta is removed and the uterine wall is vacuum aspirated using a cannula.

This is another case of judicial tyranny. Arkansas should repeal the Obama-appointed judge’s decision to the Supreme Court.

Any judge that would not let this law go into effect is a ghoulish monster! She needs to go to Hell for all Eternity. After completing reading Dr Eowyn’s excellent synopsis of what the procedure is, frankly I thought I was going to have to run for the bathroom so I could throw up. I just cannot understand why any reasonably civilized nation would allow this kind of barbarism to take place!

Sounds like a certain federal judge doesn’t understand or accept her position in the advancement of law… which comes from the democratically-elected legislature. And that the only say a judge has in the matter is in determining whether such newly-enacted laws might infringe upon a citizen’s Constitutional rights, or otherwise compromise their general case law & specific statutory rights as citizens (without good reason). It doesn’t include thinking that the old laws being replaced are more desirable. That’s not her decision to make. Time for Trump to replace this hold-over. Why hasn’t he already replaced them all?

I’m sure Trump is working as fast as he can to set America on the right track again;hopefully he has a list of things to do,and has prioritized them for maximum effect. If this is so,I’m sure these UN-American thinking Judges are on the list.

Apparently, these judges have “decided” that infants have no rights. So, if I understand this logic, if the judge were to decide that a mother shouldn’t have her child, they could just take it? After all, it doesn’t appear that the baby, or its representative, has any say in the matter.

So, by this same standard, if a man kills a pregnant woman, I guess he can’t be charged with murder for the infant? After all, it’s just “tissue” that needs to be “extracted”?

These lefty women are their own worst enemies, & enemies of all women & children, yet in her photo Baker smiles as if she is a proud Queen Bee…. Queen Wasp, rather, who will assist all women in killing their own children!

MALE lawmakers (at least those in Arkansas) have more compassion for life than this stupid woman! I’m so old-fashioned that I’d rather see women get their behinds out of judgeships, politics, corporations, etc., & go back home.

Earlier I was reading again re Nikola Tesla. Way back in 1924, a whopping 93 years ago, & 20 years before the WW2 put-women-to-work-for-the-war-effort, & 40-50 years or so BEFORE the feminazis & abortion-insanity kicked in big time, he had this to say about women of HIS day:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nikola_Tesla
[…]
Tesla … once said in earlier years that he felt he could never be worthy enough for a woman, considering women superior in every way. His opinion had started to sway in later years when he felt that women were trying to outdo men and make themselves more dominant. This “new woman” was met with much indignation from Tesla, who felt that women were losing their femininity by trying to be in power. In an interview with the Galveston Daily News on 10 August 1924 he stated, “In place of the soft voiced, gentle woman of my reverent worship, has come the woman who thinks that her chief success in life lies in making herself as much as possible like man—in dress, voice and actions, in sports and achievements of every kind … The tendency of women to push aside man, supplanting the old spirit of cooperation with him in all the affairs of life, is very disappointing to me”.
[…]

This fool of a judge makes me shudder, I am forever grateful that I’m not this judge or anyone like her, I believe in karma and I firmly believe there will be a reckoning. She needs to be recalled or fired as soon as possible. Am I the only one who believes that there are those who walk among us that do not possess a soul? She obviously has no humanity so how can she or anyone like her for that matter have a soul?